Apolipoprotein-E genotype and the risk of developing cholelithiasis following bariatric surgery: a clue to prevention of routine prophylactic cholecystectomy

Genetics of Gallstone Disease and Their Clinical Significance: A Narrative Review

Gallstone (GS) disease is common and arises from a combination of genetic and environmental factors. Although genetic abnormalities specifically leading to cholesterol GSs are rare, there are clinically significant gene variants associated with cholesterol GSs. In contrast, most bilirubin GSs can be attributed to genetic defects. The pathogenesis of cholesterol and bilirubin GSs differs greatly. Cholesterol GSs are notably influenced by genetic variants within the ABC protein superfamily, including ABCG8, ABCG5, ABCB4, and ABCB11, as well as genes from the apolipoprotein family such as ApoB100 and ApoE (especially the E3/E3 and E3/E4 variants), and members of the MUC family. Conversely, bilirubin GSs are associated with genetic variants in highly expressed hepatic genes, notably UGT1A1, ABCC2 (MRP2), ABCC3 (MRP3), CFTR, and MUC, alongside genetic defects linked to hemolytic anemias and conditions impacting erythropoiesis. While genetic cases constitute a small portion of GS disease, recognizing genetic predisposition is essential for proper diagnosis, treatment, and genetic counseling.

Risk and Prophylactic Management of Gallstone Disease in Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and A Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The frequency and management of gallstone disease (GD) in bariatric patients, including the role of routine prophylactic concomitant cholecystectomy (CCY), are still a matter of debate. This study aims to assess the risk of de novo GD in patients undergoing bariatric surgery (BS) and their predictive factors, as well as mortality and morbidity in prophylactic CCY compared to BS alone.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review, searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science until April 2021. We performed a Bayesian meta-analysis to estimate the risk of GD development after BS and the morbidity and mortality associated with BS alone versus BS + prophylactic CCY. Sources of heterogeneity were explored by meta-regression analysis.

RESULTS

The risk of de novo post bariatric GD was 20.7% (95% credible interval [95% CrI] = 13.0-29.7%; I² = 75.4%), and that of symptomatic GD was 8.2% ([95% CrI] = 5.9-11.1%; I² = 66.9%). Pre-operative average BMI (OR = 1.04; 95% CrI = 0.92-1.17) and female patients' proportion (OR = 1.00; 95% CrI = 0.98-1.04) were not associated with increased risk of symptomatic GD. BS + prophylactic CCY was associated with a 97% probability of a higher number of postoperative major complications compared to BS alone (OR = 1.74, 95% CrI = 0.97-3.55; I² = 56.5%). Mortality was not substantially different between the two approaches (OR = 0.79; 95% CrI = 0.03-3.02; I² = 20.7%).

CONCLUSION

The risk of de novo symptomatic GD after BS is not substantially high. Although mortality is similar between groups, odds of major postoperative complications were higher in patients submitted to BS + prophylactic CCY. It is still arguable if prophylactic CCY is a fitting approach for patients with a preoperative lithiasic gallbladder.

The association between apolipoprotein E and gallstone disease: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Gallstone disease (GSD) is a common biliary tract disease worldwide. Previous studies have investigated the association of apolipoprotein E (APOE) E4 with GSD and reported inconsistent results.

METHODS

In this paper, we conducted meta-analyses to examine whether APOE E4 is associated with the risk of GSD. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar using the following inclusion criteria: 1) Studies on human subjects; 2) subjects in the control group must undergo ultrasound GSD screening, and presence of GSD in the experiment group can be clearly determined, e.g., diagnosis of GSD through ultrasound screening or a previous history of cholecystectomy or cholelithiasis; 3) the studies reported APOE genotype data (APOE E4+ vs. E4-) for subjects with and without GSD. In all the meta-analyses, we used random-effects models to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) as a measure of association as well as the corresponding confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Our literature search found 13 publications with 14 studies, including a total of 1632 GSD patients and 5001 controls, that met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analyses. We did not find a significant association between APOE E4 and risk of GSD (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.89-1.68; p = 0.205). No significant associations were observed in subgroup analyses by gender and mean age. We obtained similar insignificant findings if an additive model was used, if subjects who had E2E4 genotype were excluded, or if low-quality studies were excluded.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis found insufficient evidence for the effect of APOE E4 on GSD risk. Future studies with large sample sizes that control for important confounding/risk factors are needed to validate our findings and to explore other genetic loci that might affect GSD risk.

A meta-analysis of apolipoprotein E gene ε2/ε3/ε4 polymorphism for gallbladder stone disease

Background

Numerous studies have investigated the relationship between apolipoprotein (Apo) E gene polymorphisms and gallbladder stone disease (GSD) across ethnic populations; however, the results are often inconsistent. This meta-analysis aims to comprehensively evaluate the influence of a common ε2/ε3/ε4 polymorphism in Apo E gene on the risk of gallbladder stone disease.

Method

Data were analyzed using the RevMan software (V5.1) and a random-effects model was applied irrespective of between-study heterogeneity. Publication bias was weighed using the fail-safe number.

Results

There were 17 study populations totaling 1773 cases and 2751 controls for ε2/ε3/ε4 polymorphism of Apo E gene. Overall comparison of alleles ε2 with ε3 in all study populations yielded a 16% decreased risk for GSD (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.68–1.05; P = 0.31; I² = 13%), and comparison of alleles ε4 with ε3 yielded a 25% increased risk (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.97–1.61; P = 0.0003; I² = 63%). Subgroup analysis by study design indicated that the magnitude of association in hospital-based studies was largely significantly strengthened for ε4 allelic model (odds ratio [OR]  = 1.46; 95% CI: 1.05–2.02; p = 0.0007; I² = 65%). Subgroup analysis by age of controls indicated a remarkably significant elevation in the magnitude of association in age >50 subgroups in ε4 allelic model (OR = 1.50; 95% CI: 1.03–2.19; p = 0.0009; I² = 72%). Moreover, subgroup analysis by cases gender indicated a reduction in the magnitude of association in male<30% studies for E2/2 genotypic model (OR = 0.32; 95% CI: 0.07–1.49; p = 0.16; I² = 45%).

Conclusions

Our results reveal that Apo E gene ε4 allele is a risk factor of gallbladder stone disease, especially in elder people and Chinese population.

Apolipoprotein E genotype and gallbladder disease risk in a large population-based cohort

PURPOSE

The aim of the study is to describe the association between apolipoprotein E (apoE) genotype and gallbladder disease incidence.

METHODS

Cases of incident hospitalized gallbladder disease were ascertained in nearly 13,000 middle-aged men and women participating in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study, a prospective cohort study in four US communities.

RESULTS

Between the ARIC baseline examination (1987 to 1989) and December 31, 2001, a total of 639 participants were hospitalized for gallbladder disease. After adjustment for age, sex, race, obesity, plasma lipid level, and diabetes, the relative risk for hospitalized gallbladder disease associated with the presence of an epsilon4 allele (i.e., genotypes E4/4, E3/4, and E2/4 versus other genotypes) was 0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.87). Stratification by race showed that the inverse association with epsilon4 was stronger in whites (relative risk, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.85) than African Americans (relative risk, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.58-1.30). The presence of the other rare isoform, epsilon2 (i.e., genotypes E2/2, E2/3, and E2/4 versus others) was associated with a modest increased risk for gallbladder disease (relative risk, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.05-1.57).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that independent of traditional risk factors, apoE genotype may influence gallbladder disease risk, particularly in whites. The exact biologic mechanism for such an association remains unclear and requires further investigation.

Gastric surgery

Most significant research relating to gastric surgery in the past year has centered on surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Antireflux surgery has become more popular with advanced laparoscopic technology. Two previously accepted surgical principles have been challenged by current studies: the importance of division of the short gastrics and the dictum that partial fundoplication is preferred for patients at risk for dysphagia. Additionally, risk factors for postoperative dysphagia have been identified, allowing for better patient selection and education. Further study on the cause of GERD has shown a positive correlation between pathologic gastroesophageal reflux and those with hiatal hernia or disordered esophageal peristalsis, although cause or effect has not yet been established. Literature relating to bariatric surgery has confirmed the safety and efficacy of the laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, and several papers address the appropriateness of prophylactic cholecystectomy in these patients. The role of laparoscopic surgery for treatment of perforated peptic ulcer disease has now been validated, with subsequent eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection. The relationship of H. pylori infection to acutely bleeding ulcers is less clear. Indications for ulcer surgery are predominantly limited now to perforation and bleeding because of the availability of effective acid-reducing medications and recognition of the role of H. pylori infection.